Tech

By Slim

January 17, 2007 04:22 PM | Link to this

Congratulations Matt, you were able to find a way to include the words “funky”, “vibe”, and Chan (Gailey) in the same sentence. That’s never been done before.

By tater10

January 17, 2007 04:27 PM | Link to this

Who’s got enough money to buyout Chan’s contract? PLEASE GIVE!$$$ I’m so tired of his BS. Our offense has declined by 10 points since he got to the Flats! He’s never beaten Georgia! All he does is ride Tenuta’s coattails. Oh, and I shouldn’t have to mention the RBall fiasco. NICE DECISION MAKING FOR A WONDERFUL HEAD COACH! And all you Chan lover’s who answer loyalty to that fiasco, HOW ABOUT THAT LOYALTY NOW?

By George

January 17, 2007 04:29 PM | Link to this

Dickey has to stop taking the ball down below his chest, stop dribbling in traffic, and take the ball up quicker and strong when he gets it.

By GT80

January 17, 2007 04:42 PM | Link to this

Gee, can you tell the growing sentiment among fans regarding Chan??? Like, go ahead and leave if your so interested in these NFL jobs. As is our way, there will be no firing of Chan. We just have to hope and pray the Dolphins offer him the job. You know he wants to take it.

By Born Football

January 17, 2007 05:37 PM | Link to this

I wouldn’t be so quick as to get rid of the ole boy. I’ve seen it happen before. I look at it as like a lawyer does in “don’t ask a question if you don’t already know the answer”. You may end up with a Bunting or a Amato. And those 2 schools accept JC and Hargrave kids. There’s no excuse for them.

By Geoffrey Paul

January 17, 2007 05:43 PM | Link to this

Ok, the loyalty thing… I believe continuing to play Reggie Ball was as much about loyalty to Taylor as it was about loyalty to Reggie. How fair would it have been for Chan to trot Taylor out for his first significant action against our biggest rival U(sic)GA, or in a conference championship game? That would be extremely unfair. In retrospect, we feel Taylor could have probably handled it, but I think it was wise of Chan to know that Taylor was going to get his shot soon anyway, and that it would very much be in Taylor’s interest to get his first start in ND, as the entrenched starter, than to get a midseason start in a pressure cooker situation. Reggie, as his immature actions often have done, forced Chan’s hand on this one. Everyone, including Chan I’m sure, is now glad that Reggie forced his hand, b/c hindsight is 20/20 and I’m sure Chan is just as excited about next year as we are now that he has seen Taylor perform in an important game. I say that Reggie forced Chan’s hand b/c Chan has always been known as an exremely creative offensive mind (he came up with the Slash concept in Pittsburgh), yet Tech’s offense has been really vanilla for 4 seasons. Reason: Reggie Ball. Why don’t we throw over the middle? Reggie Ball. Why don’t we use the tight ends? Reggie Ball. Reggie’s shortcomings and immaturity forced Chan’s hand. Despite this, he was able to orchestrate huge upsets (Auburn twice, Miami last year, VT this year, etc.) In this way, Chan is a victim of his own success. The amount of talent he inherited was very low, and he coached them up to a level which allowed them to OVER achieve. After setting that bar, when the team would inevitably perform at their actual level, the fanbase wondered why we were losing if we could win the big ones. The truth is that the big upsets were the aberation and were a result of great coaching.

Nonetheless, Chan’s decision making about playing Reggie was spot-on in terms of doing the best thing for Taylor. Now, if you want to argue that it may have been the best thing for Taylor, but not for the team… well then that is a decent argument.

By gtce1978

January 17, 2007 06:02 PM | Link to this

Great Post Geoffrey. Couldn’t agree with you more. I’ve often asked who could have gotten the same results with the talent we had. It says something to me when Bill Cowher recommended Gailey for the Steeler’s job. That means a lot more to me than the gripers and whiners on these blogs. Now that Tech is getting the scholarship restrictions and the previous athletic administrations poor support of academics behind us, the next year or two really gives everyone a fair chance to evaluate Chan. Right now Chan and his staff have us lined up for the best recruiting class perhaps in Tech history. Let’s see what he does with the same level of talent that UGA (Donan, Goff, et al), Tennessee and others manage to squander every year (hmmm - how many national titles have they won since 1990?). Gailey’s situation is similar to that of Mike Shula - look at the crap he inherited at Bama and look at the improved state of the program he handed off to the “can’t miss” Nick Saban. Not wishing Saban bad luck, but I can’t wait to see Alabama’s return on their money, thanks to the work that Shula did to get them straightend out. But, of course, he won’t get the credit for it - just like Gailey.

By BLEADING WHITE & GOLD

January 17, 2007 06:08 PM | Link to this

Once again we can thank Dave Brainless for leaving us with a mess. First he hires a very nice man, but a very average coach at best. Then just befor he retires he locks us into a 2011 deal with this very average coach. It’s a one-way deal too! If we want to get rid of him we will have to buy him out of a long contract, but if he chooses to leave he did not get a 1 or 2 million dollar buy out to help defray the cost of replacing him.

This is a bad deal that will just keep on giving. If Miami does not take Chan now, he will be on every NFL Teams interview list in the future. Why not, he would be cheap with no buy-out and has NFL experience. We and our recruits will be put through this again and again. That is why I think it would be best for Tech if Miami takes him and we end this all right now!

Thanks again Dave, you left us with money problems, academic scandles and an average to poor head Coach with a bad contract for Tech. You just keep on giving!

By Clay

January 17, 2007 06:18 PM | Link to this

I will not cry if Chan leaves. Not nearly as much sadness as when Calvin said he was leaving. But that doesn’t mean that I am not worried. we have a stellar recruiting class coming in that we desperately need. If Chan goes will the class go with him? If he has done nothing else he has put the program in a good position to grow. Now we need someone to bring it to fruition. If he goes then we need to find a coach and fast.

By ArkyTech

January 17, 2007 06:53 PM | Link to this

I, too, want for all this with Coach Gailey to get resolved. It’s taking too long. But come on all you whiners and complainers. Do you seriously think you know more about coaching than the NFL, Bill Cowher, and all those kids that love Coach Gailey!

I know some of you out there just live to complain - and if there is a coaching change you’ll be complaining about who is hired, or you’ll be begging for them to be fired in a couple years.

The program is clearly moving in the right direction, despite the disappointing ending to this season - but this season is over! Get over it you whiners - it’s time to look forward to September in South Bend!

By John Conklin

January 17, 2007 09:31 PM | Link to this

I hope chan stays. I’d like to see our squad without Reggie behind center — who knows with the excellent returning talent combined with the incoming guys, we could be on the brink of a higher standard for our program. If I recall, Frank Beamer struggled for his first several years (7+ if memory serves) before things really took off.

By Ben

January 18, 2007 03:07 AM | Link to this

Since they closed comments on Terrance Moore’s column, I just wanted to say that it doesn’t mean much that two NFL looked at Gailey, because both of those teams have recent histories of picking bad coaches. Now if Bill Belichek decided to retire, and the Patriots wanted Gailey, then I would be impressed.

And lest we forget, the home NFL team, who has seen a lot of Gailey, didn’t even hint about wanting to talk to him.

That said, I like Gailey, and I think the entire GT nation would adore him if he had dropped Reggie Ball after his sophomore year when it was obvious he wasn’t getting better.

By jackets fan

January 18, 2007 07:55 AM | Link to this

Ben,

You need to do your homework before you speak. Pittsburgh with a bad history of picking coaches?!?!?!? I guess so, when you only have 2 coaches in a 30+ year time frame. Moron. Bill Cowher was there since 1992 and Chuck Knoll was there from the 1970’s until 1992.

GT needs Gailey to stay to keep this recruiting class intact. Without Reggie Ball this team will be fine. But starting completely from scratch again will only set GT back, especially since it is too late to try to get a “better” coach now.

By ugarph79

January 18, 2007 08:36 AM | Link to this

I’ve read some posts that argue for hiring Tenuta (hope I spelled it right) if CG leaves. And now that Whisenhunt is off the market I’m wondering who else might be on the wishlist of GT fans as a head coach.

By jackets fan

January 18, 2007 08:49 AM | Link to this

I think Gailey is going to stay. He has an agreement in his contract with GT that puts a deadline on his ability to seek NFL jobs, and based on what I’ve read and heard (including Morgan Burnett’s comments that this would be resolved today), I think the deadline must be this week or maybe even today. And I don’t think Miami is completely thru interviewing candidates. So unless Gailey blew them away, which is unlikely since new candidates surfaced just in the past week (Mike Shula), he’ll most likely take himself out of consideration today. Then we can all get back to talking about recruiting.

By Bleading White and Gold

January 18, 2007 10:21 AM | Link to this

This may get resolved today with Chan pulling his name for the Miami job. But it will continue to happen in the future because Dave Brainless did not get an expensive buy-out clause in his contract. See my comments above. It will be too cheap and easy to broaden an NFL search list with Chan’s name. Do we want to go through this again and again for an average coach at best! Yes we have a great recruiting class this year, but we have not had good recruiting all the other Chan years. Don’t kid yourself, this class is due to Giff not Chan. Most if not all of these recruits would stay if we elevated Tenuta to head Coach and kept Giff as a recruiter. We would get out of this bad contract with an average Coach and end this endless cycle of disruption to future recruiting classes. For these reasons it would be best if Miami takes Chan, and bails GT out of some Dave Brainless mistakes.

By Yellow Jacket

January 18, 2007 11:12 AM | Link to this

In my opinion we just need to cut ties with Chan, and begin talks with JT as head coach. By doing this it will more than likely keep the current coaching staff in place (we could probabyl get rid of Nix) and perhaps JT could hire Larry Coker as OC. Keep Giff, get a new QB coach and I’m sure JT knows a good DC. By doing all of this it would keep the recruiting class pretty much in tact.

You all have to belive that Dan Rad. has someone in mind that he would use to replace Chan if he should bail for the NFL, he’s a lot smarter than Dave Brainless and I’m sure he just not sitting around “waiting” for Chan to make up his mind.

By dannycardwell

January 18, 2007 11:40 AM | Link to this

now is not a good time to get rid of chan. this year with a good solid quarterback, we could go all the way. other than the reggie mistake he has done a lot better than most people that dont like him want to admit. im not a fan of his either, but this team is on the edge of being great. a coaching change could be devastating. give him one more year and lets see.

By George P

January 18, 2007 12:09 PM | Link to this

Yellow Jacket, Coker is part of the Arkansas/Oklahoma mafia, he’ll probably wind up on Houston Nutt’s staff. The Dolphins just gave Dom Capers a huge offer to stay on as defensive coordinatior no matter who the head coach is. I can’t see there being space for Tenuta on the staff, but I guess anything is possible. I would think that if the job goes to Jimbo Fisher, that he would be allowed to bring in his own DC.

By ArkyTech

January 18, 2007 01:07 PM | Link to this

Bleeding White and Gold, what are you talking about when you say we’ll have to through this every year? Coach Gailey has been here 5 years and to our knowledge this is the first time he has ever interviewed for another job. It just happened that two NFL teams that he has ties to had openings in the same year. And even recruiting analysts say this makes the program look good.

And what’s with all the Dave Braine hate? Was Paul Hewitt a bad hire? How about Danny Hall? And Coach Gailey is far from a Bill Lewis/Ray Goff/Mike Shula/Chuck Amato/Jim Bunting/Mike Price type of hire. Eveyone has their favorite coaches, so back off and see what happens. There is quite a lot to be optimistic about.

By vrad

January 19, 2007 03:06 PM | Link to this

Geoff, except there is a thing called substitutions in football. He did not need to play only Taylor. He could have brought him out, and seen how he handled the pressure, and bring RB in if he failed.

Also, RB was injured before the Clemson game, and continued to be injured thru the season. In at least one of those games, (esp the Duke one, which did not matter at all), Bennet could have started and stayed the whole game.

Besides, making him start a bowl game, against Wvu, and letting him know about it a week before, because the punk RB could no keep up his grades, is no better.